REAGAN AND LAWYERS

The Reagan years were not a period of coexistence. The Reagan years were a period considered to be a “conservative revolution.” Reagan had intention of loosing that battle; and thus the trickle down economics signified its widespread appeal for a war of introspection. What was the Reagan years about and how did this relate to the dismay or the mismanagement felt during the 1960s with the way society was being managed and specifically the way people were fighting or refused to fight on Vietnam?

Reagan knew you could not drop a bomb on a building or a headquarters to fulfill this conservative revolution and the reversal of liberal economics. What he did was he grabbed the largest object possible and restored it with conservatism and conservative economics; that is the economy itself. The effects were like dropping a bomb on a headquarters or a building resided by the liberals. Those who were right along with him began to question whether their loyalties were safe even if Reagan stood for total fairness and very opposite to liberals. The question was whether coexistence was possible and what was required for this coexistence?

The biggest problem and the single most difficult problem with liberals is they cannot keep their hands off of people and do not understand “keep away.” Even if they decry all kinds of social injustices and inequality, they simply do not and will not abide respect the feelings of others and either keep away or keep their hands off of them. This inability to keep away or stay away can sometimes make people extremely angry and violent; most especially is when it entails the exploitation or sexual abuse of their children. Keep in mind, the most problematic aspect of life the liberals have in their life is this temptation to keep away or stay away. This is why liberalism is sometimes linked to a violation of privacy and the single unit; thus the family unit; thus individualism. Liberalism too upholds an extreme form of individualism and the need to be part of some type of family structure to give balance, meaning, and life. Therefore, liberals must have involvement or some form of mentorship resulting from this extreme individualism and alienation. The ones who are atheist are the ones who can make the points more clearly. Those liberals who are politicians, powerful lawyers, or even prominent figures feel hurt and insulted when they are rejected; but they also view others as a deranged employee you cannot get rid of. The problem with liberals is this need to be involved and this desire to be the mentor of others; but the deep problem is the inability to keep away or keep their hands off others. Maybe something terrible will happen if they see things differently.

Since the 1960s and the liberal surge to social iniquities; words beginning with the letter “L” began appearing everywhere. Liberals, lawyers, lectures, “L” feminism, and liberty all came together and unified under the Democratic Party and global democracy. Liberalism and feminism outraced and outshined even Maoism and Marxism; the hottest thing on the planet was liberalism. Behind that liberalism was what people viewed as the “scourge” of society, lawyers. Nobody had to hang onto to socialism, Marxism, or Maoism any longer because students and lawyers were beating them. They were beating them in China, in England, in the United States, and all of the Middle East. There were very few and suspicious areas that were not affected by this “greatest” movement on earth. In the mind of a liberal, they are the greatest thing living and breathing on this earth and it must be respected with dignity and theocratic charity.

While everyone was blaming lawyers, lawyers became the “richest class.” They dominated academia, they dominated the business world, they dominated government, and they dominated everything other than war. The new phenomenon now was “crime” and the role of the lawyer to address the affect of crime on the lives of others. Was it a conspiracy of inequality and a crime or were they willing to expose what was really going on and the barrage of the left wing and liberals for the “richest class?” Now, if you wanted any voice or wanted to prevent crime, you had to make an offering to the richest class on earth. If you didn’t then you were attacked, held prisoner, and underwent all kinds of “conspiracy” by the “richest class” of liberals walking the free and not so free world. Were they the “scourge” they were made out to be or were they “heroes” which they wanted others to believe? These secrets are the problem with lawyers and the problem with the left wing; their unapologetic will to incarcerate innocent people and withhold information which will exonerate or clear the situation up for everyone. Truth to the liberals and the left wing is merely something they “choose” for the right price. They way they use the law and “lawyerism” is opportunistic and criminal. So why does everybody rely on it if it is so damaging?

We live in a world where two creatures inhabit the earth. One is based on greatness and the other is constantly fighting for a post to stay with or keep up with this greatness. We live in a world where two creatures define the fault lines between greatness and a total looser. Somewhere between those faults are lawyers. If you are on one side, you blame greatness. If you are on the other side, you blame total losers. Lawyers just want your money and to defend the law, the person themselves is irrelevant to the law. Who it is and what they want is irrelevant. This is about winning and only winning. This is about going to war without actually saying so or doing so. It is about terrorism without coming out and saying “self defense.” This is about the relationship between the law and money. It is about the law. To the liberals, they are the law. They are the judge, the jury, and the executioner. Conservatives are not that reckless and irresponsible with their life. The role of both the lawyer and the politician is to find out what they can or cannot get away with then bring it back to “their clients” on privacy.

Believe it or not, there are people willing to pay massive salaries and money to defend their position and their positions in life. When government takes away that position or position in life; they have to pay lawyers or government a “ransom.” People pay millions and even the upper reaches of billions of dollars just to keep government peaceful and out of their lives. As difficult as it may sound, that is the same problem with liberals and the left wing because they are robots, brain dead, and on automatic. Some conservatives do this and call it “private” interests. Their pride and ego is what makes them sadistic and murderous. So when you look at all the enemies this world has faced and all the enemies who have challenged freedom itself, this is by far the worst and the most dangerous of them all. They have at their disposal, all the tools of freedom and all the tools of repression to wage war. They have the protection of secrecy and the rights to just ignore or avoid the situation. No other enemy is allowed this benefit or advantage while they are even viewed as heroes. The success of lawyers, liberals, liberty, and the big “L” word; is objectivity and unbiased. The truth violates all of those rules. The success and victory of liberals and the left wing is based on this objectivity and the lack of any responsibility or preventive measures. In the end, it all blows up or self combusts. In this fight, you are prejudged and everybody has made up their minds already.

Certain religions and belief systems empower people to a higher sophistication where objectivity and even this “fault” line are possible. The fault line divides the great and the total loser world. Everybody in that fault line is fighting for the chance to call themselves champions or the “all powerful.” So who is the best and the most powerful? Is it the lawyer? Is it the richest? Is it the most objective? Is it the smartest? The most read? The best analysis or reasons? The unifier and unhateful? The ones who can read, write, and speak the best? The ones who take more risk? Who is going to live and survive to the very end when all out war is nonstop and inevitable with all the fury, rage, and destruction this earth knows? Is it the God fearing? Perhaps the fearless? Who is this enemy? Whoever it is we can draw up schematics and diagram and determine who overlaps who then repeats the same message without any religion or religious meanings. Lawyers represent two worlds; one inhabited by losers and the other by greatness; crime and criminals are somewhere between those extremes.

The history of who is or has been successful is not on par and in line with who will be successful. When governments intervene because people are affected or injured, things become complicated because it is not the role of governments to favor the enemy or they know is the aggressor. The role of the government is to provide a forum to peace and enforce the actors and participants in that process. When and if you take that forum away, perhaps by privatization or pure aggression; life ceases. You will have looting, rioting and local militias and gangs everywhere fighting for privatization or self defense. If they break or violate the terms of peace, then it is the role of the government to enforce the wrath of God because ultimately it is God who is the arbiter between mankind. The role of government is to find who God is or who it is not; this may come by pluralism, populist election, or other. Government is not an exercise to determine who has been successful and who have not been recipients of new favors, bribes, and various corruptions. Until or unless these liberals and lawyers provide the necessary information to dismantle this threat, life itself will be doomed to the past. History is messy and messing up the future. They can play these games all day long but it is not fooling anyone, only upsetting them and making them think these people are unrepentant and unapologetic.

There are a lot of lawyers, liberals included, who believe Marxism or Maoism is not possible unless you have liberalism as a permanent condition. Furthermore, there are no anti-communists who feel the reverse is true or permanent. They feel that the most popular beliefs and religions are the ones which uphold freedom; but the hypocrisy is how even the founding fathers of the United States can believe in freedom and slavery at the single moment in time. This is the reality and the world we live in. There are people who can believe in two beliefs which are in direct opposition and constant battle simultaneous and in the same moment in time. To them, the truth is absolute and thought, not history or experience. It is filled with contradictions and people who try desperately to hang onto or hold onto a world moving much quicker than they are. The problem with liberals is how they want to be viewed as righteous. They want to be viewed as heroes and the leaders of the free world. Their problem and their malfunction are deeply rooted in who they are and what they believe in. For liberals to be righteous, they must act righteously; to say righteous things and have the honest convictions which offer others the fair and honest judgment of them. When they deny this judgment and even hypocrisy of judgment, they not only deny others freedom but they will destroy the world as we know it. This is the worst and most dangerous enemy this world has yet to face in either peacetime or during warfare.

When the period after the Reagan years, from 1988 to 2008, began to reverse and even worsen the conservative revolution; something had happened. No longer was the conservative revolution respected by the people who were in it to the end. To be in it to the end, they had to reverse it; two thoughts in only one moment of time but moving in the same directions; or trying to. Thus, the twenty or so years shifting back and forth between the Clinton and Bush families trying to escape the little box Reagan had created for everyone became oratory and not mental action. Keep in mind, Reagan sought victory. He did not make promises about being safe unless this conservative revolution was sought to the end. That box he created also caused widespread panic. The question is why?

Since the early 1970s, public debt really began to become significant. The catalyst for this was severe economic woes internal and domestic. The problem was dependence on government which eventually would cost the public huge amounts of debt. On top of this internal problem were global conditions which did not favor the liberals and their equal charge after the 1960s and the overthrow of government.

Those who felt unsafe or affected by the Reagan years began to grow increasingly reliant on debt. Federal debt was now “recycled” and “reversing” the Reagan revolution. Was it overthrowing the government or just delaying it? It was delaying it at the expense of the idea that conservatives and liberals would live together peacefully and enjoy the benefits of large government and big government solutions. Herein lays the sneaky deception because those dollars and debt were funneled back into elections and into the pockets of liberals who used it to destroy conservatives. That, who was in it to the end, that is the Reagan revolution, overthrew the revolution and was on a course to reverse it, legitimately. In the Reagan box, what do you have to give up in order winning? Do you have to give up your ideology or politics? What do you want or not want to give up and why?

This reversal of the right wing came from the political leaders of the ideological right wing. It whipped the left wing in frenzy and they too joined in the siege and capture of the right wing. Like what happened in Vietnam, many conservatives felt the right and right wing once again betrayed them; it was happening again and again. However, it was not happening in the usual style of liberals but a whimper like way and means. To the conservatives, the right wing was now infested with money and lacked any leadership or qualities of leadership. These lawyers shifted the control and balance. Now the “fairness” was in money and how it was flowing from the right wing to the left wing and all at the expense of debt or accounting malfeasance. The only reason why it was not acknowledged as corruption or embezzlement was because it had public knowledge and approval. Once again, this infusion of power and money strikes the right wing with illogic by their leaders who had managed to win one election after another. The people who were now empowering the left wing and encouraging them to capture or incarcerate the right wing, was actually the leaders of the right wing. Even if they spoke vehemently about this, they still allowed the recycle and flow of money back to the left and claimed it was to “clean up” after the Reagan revolution. Keep in mind, Reagan sought victory; not defeat at the ballet box. In seeking bullet victory, he was investigated heavily by the left and challenged on every major advantage. Now the right wing had another new enemy inside its leadership who encouraged defeat of the right wing at the ballad box.

After the Reagan years, there is a lot of destruction of right wing politics going on. Terms such as “Nazi” were being thrown around with liberal ease while the left wing was unstoppable and encroaching. There is a refusal in religion to view religion for what it is and this is hard to let go. There were so many secrets and elusive acts, accounting became impossible while the Reagan years were hijacked. It was not a lack of money; it was a lack of leadership. You can infuse politics with all the money in the world and all the debt change can afford, the leadership will never arrive. That lack of leadership was transferring money from the right wing to the left wing. Thus, we are in this period of constant and unwavering limbo trying to figure out how to reverse the Reagan revolution. If there was a sucker punch nobody saw coming, it was after the Reagan years when liberals began to experience the worst time in their lives. What do you have to give up to achieve victory is the box. Reagan built that box and applied a heavier level of scrutiny. However, rich people, most especially liberal ones, are reluctant to changes about who they are or are not; they have to give up their religion. This is why in the Constitution it says clearly a separation between Church and state even if they did not know what they were talking about or given up.

REAGAN AND LIBERALS

When you understand inflation, you can begin to put it into perspective and military terms. Inflation is the closest concept this world has to the devil. When you peg the military or peg a currency to global trade, then that single unit is the chosen one to keep the global peace. It can peg however it feels and wants. However, inflation violates all the rules because not only does it destroy wealth, it makes it impossible for the military to peg when inflation pressures tells trading partners to dump it. If you are living in the Post Modern world and want to promote socialism, then you also want to promote inflation while you impose harsh measures to control the economy and socialize it. When you do this, you will wipe the slate clean and you have more or less stopped the military from pegging. This is the only vehicle to peace in this world and the prevention of murder and chaos. A military operation does include temporary humanitarian needs but the ultimate goal is to restore an economy, not subsidize it or set off the conditions for a welfare state. However, at this time it is nearly impossible with the looming insignificance of Congress and their constant meddling in security issues. They need to understand that inflation is the closest thing on this earth to the devil even if they cannot see a physical being. When you have an uncontrollable welfare state and constant double digit inflation, how can you possibly peg or say security is occurring when the welfare state is out of control? Without security of global security, there will not be any global trade and global economics. Negative political forces will seize the instruments of government and begin to point the finger at others as they are injured and displaced by their own insignificance. They will begin to use environmentalism dogma, poverty dogma, false dogma, and any kind of criticism because they do not want to be exposed for being behind enemy lines.

In the post modern world, everyone is agreeing to free trade and open trade, even the former communist states. What is more, they want a fair life and a fair opportunity in life. The reason why people wake up each and every day thinking about how they can make their life better or enjoy life more is because they want to be rich. When you create a system which allows this and allows people to wake up each and every day to better their lot and think of ways to make success a reality, then it is a powerful concept. People want to compete fairly and want to be recognized as a strong economy, a force of education, a nation who produces great engineers, and they want to plug into other economies which they relate to and can emphasize. If you bombard society with negativism, sustainable environmentalism, liberalism, left wing usurpations, and the negativism towards the market economy, then people do not wake up everyday with dreams about life anymore. Now they are worried and angry. Now they are distracted and upset. Now they want to strike out and become violent because this source of “peace’ is actually the devil in disguise. The more people are reluctant to change, the more they refuse to rid their negativism, the more they slip into devil worship, and the more they resort on government to now take over for their negativism; the worse conditions will get for them and the more violent karma they will build on. Like all insular and controlled societies, when it implodes, it does so with violent and social looting. These forces of change and hope may view themselves as some cure but others view them as the closest thing to the devil, which is liberalism.

People are tapping into technology to keep industrial strength and to industrialize. Yet still, you cannot make an automobile in one region and expect the same car in another region regardless of the technology involved. Inflation will always keep this the same. What people will do and what people will expect is to utilize the opportunity created by upset customers and the lack of quality in people or employees. This is why quality of people is essential to global trade and a significant measure to determine success. If you have a little tyrant and despot, then you will create a lot of upset customers and people will now see this as opportunity to provide either a better product or one at a lower cost. Complaining about competition will do nothing but substantiate there is oxygen in this world but the complainer cannot smell it.

We live in a world filled with oxygen and nobody can smell it and what is worse, only part of the world realizes it is there. Their anger and resentment is the opportunity behind market forces. That anger and resentment is also the role of the government. The market system exists because of that anger and resentment only because it is an already squandered opportunity. When governments sit there and make it a way of life, then the world will not stop while they try to “cover up” what is actually occurring. They are complaining about oxygen because they cannot smell it. They now are fighting everyone and violating every law on the books because they cannot smell oxygen and think it is the source of life. They feel that if they do not fight, kill, imprison others, and become murderous; they will be denied oxygen. What is now your oxygen is their oxygen. Unless you give them and the oxygen police oxygen, you get no oxygen. This is an individual who has to be put down and should be allowed a fair chance to turn themselves in peacefully since peace is what oxygen if for.

The Reagan era from 1980 to 1988 was the most miserable time period for the liberals and especially liberal economists. Specifically, Reaganomics was now linked to a restoration process which began in and during the 1960s which was in full swing. Reagan and Reaganomics shut that open door to the Cold War. The Reagan era was in one aspect economic theory and on another level to address the management of the Vietnam War. Specifically it was over the War Powers Act and what he considered Congressional and legal powers gone unchecked which he wanted to restore with Presidential power and credibility. The future of the world depended on this but at the time it was a process of discovery and an unwritten script. After 1988, the executive powers were diminished by both the Bush and Clinton families and legislative powers began to challenge what Reagan had started. If it were not for the Bush and Clinton families, the Reagan era would have concluded and ended this delay and period of limbo after 1988.

Instead, fiscal and monetary policy was auctioned off at the expensive cost of debt and principles, reversing the period prior to the Reagan years. This was now being sold as reality to both the poor and the rich by the genius of the liberal economists. The problem is quite simple; how can you declare yourself a Reagan conservative while preventing victory or reversing what Reagan started then say you “cleaned up” his mess? What you did was broke the principles and blew the fiscal and monetary policies out of whack. If you can do all of that and not have an honest answer while being called a hypocrite by the liberals and left wing; then that is an act which is brilliant. This is not about hypocrites; instead it is about the closest representation we know to the devil in existence and in mankind. Furthermore, they like to tinker and play God in one form or another by messing with other’s life and their reality. This nation is still waiting for the end of the Reagan years. It is a wreck, why continue it by spending and borrowing more. To me it is cowardice and lying which is switching back and forth between the Bush family and the Clinton family. The problem has been to call government wealth, debt, or even help. What it is or is not, is “their” money; so the question is why should anyone stop looting the government when everyone and everybody can benefit? The poor can benefit from the government and the rich can benefit from government and all we should do is call it debt or fiscal policy. Those who speak out or expose thievery are not allowed to benefit or call themselves citizens, needy, or banished by the clan.

It is preferable that these jackasses not make an effort to constantly contact us because at the root of their problems are responsibility and accountability. They are considered rogues and misfits who are going around declaring themselves an ally. They use the funds of the state and the public to against others, including us. If there is an easy way to look at this, then it is a model of a bad employee, how do you get rid of a bad employee? They sit outside and watch you, every move you make, and are not welcomed. They play with your computers and download all sorts of things, then create all kinds of problems because they are an employee who feels it is their life. This is some circus and a comedy act who is so whacked out, an ignorant fool, likes this cloak and dagger toughness, and who only wants to sadistically possess others or feel powerful enough to effect them somehow. Imagine if a bad employee kept on contacting and harassing the boss who is trying to get rid of them instead of trying to contact them? How would they feel and to what lengths will they try to “play it off” as some strong and powerful fool who relies on tricks, deception, and security to become more paranoid and murderous? Now imagine how others would feel if this jackass kept trying to make contact and would not stop while they kept saying how their security is threatened. There must be snipers sitting in trees everywhere or maybe even the devil. If these people work hand and hand with us, we would love to speak to them under our own terms. There is no need to play with this reality or worry about security, they will not beat or come near God when he judges them.

We do not want or need these people to constantly make an effort to contact us. We do not need to be their prisoner or the prisoner of their security forces. It is comical how they are sneaking around already, now they are sneaking around more. When they contact you, it is under complete secrecy and their security imprisons you because “threats are everywhere.” Next thing you know, life is all messed up, bad things happen, and nobody wants to accept any responsibility. All because a jackass wants to talk to you and their security wants to make sure no threats are present. Isn’t the threat or the true threat the one sneaking around and not accepting responsibility or the one who just can’t seem to get it right? This is like the foreign saboteurs and enemies of the state taking you hostage and telling you they are doing security. These people know just how much danger they are in and why. All they are worried about is how comfortable they are while they demand to talk to you and you cannot stand them or how stupid they are. Even worse is their security who thinks they own you and you must do everything they say because they are a foreign guest. It is the most absurd and ridiculous act anyone will ever witness; there is no need to be calling everyone else under the cloak of absolute secrecy when everyone knows they are nothing but jackasses and bad employees.

ON ISRAEL AND THE 1960'S

2008 will mark the 60th anniversary for the state of Israel. In 2008, this world and the governments of the world are divided into two worlds and maybe even more. The 1960s movement of counter culture signified the division of this world into two or more worlds and it is also associated with the birth of the devil. How do the forces and the leaders of the 1960s view the events in the Middle East? Do the peace activists and the liberals know something about Israel and their military which nobody else knows? Surely, there is a movement in this world to rethink the way we do things and the way life is lived, but how will these peace protestors and anti war activists seek to rethink the Israelis state? This is not just an open democratic state, it is also a theocracy. How come with all the problems in this world and all the conflicts and strife; the only ones who seem to avoid criticism are the theocracies? Theocratic regimes are coupled to hard line divisions and repressions for a belief system.

So are liberal democracies and liberal economic societies as free as they believe? Or on the flip side, are they as free as what they exist in, freedom? Why would liberals want to rethink the way people live life and become the police for this way of life while they insist it is a higher level of freedom? Well, where did theocracies slip through their paranoia or total sense of negativism? When people are a prisoner to another way of life, it is the end of the world and it is hard to say they are free or live in a free society. But why are these specific problems escaping the reality and way of life for the liberals? Why is it so special that the United States rethinks their way of life and not others? Why are the United States and her military so unique in her problems which force the fabric of society to be torn apart and forced to rethink ignorance and hate or else be a prisoner or incarcerated? Why is this model of ignorance and hate such a different way to live that government has to be looking over the shoulders of others every single minute?

The idea is why the concept of peace has to be rethought when nobody else or nowhere else is necessary? There are wars which have been ongoing for centuries but none of them have any problems with anti war protestors or socialists. Whey is the problems of the United States so unique with Israelis and defined by the events of the 1960s where peace is impossible, at least legally? Do the leaders of the United States need to rethink what peace is or ignorance and hate? Why are theocracies immune from anti war protestors but not immune from atheistic socialist groups? People describe the United States as a theocracy simply because it is based on morals and ethics. How come theocracies escape the socialists or the paranoia of these enemies of the state?

Liberal democracies are just that, liberal democracies. However, in a theocracy, open markets are a threat. They are a threat only because an open market can only exist when and if there is some unifying force, reglion is not that force. So what is the unifying force in the Middle east; localism, regionalism, or global view point? In a liberal democracy, democracy has no limits or controls; but in a theocracy, how can you have no limits and no control by religion? If a global leader in the world has a set way to think or has made their mind up, then that individual needs to view with grave suspicion and stupidity. We have heard some of the strongest arguments and some of the most aggressive ignorance on this subject unlike any other encountered. Perhaps there are some peace activists who need to rethink peace or their ignorance along with what they have or have not done? When they are ready to present their new unadulterated views without any regrets or objections, the world will dismantle each and every single one of these incriminating acts and stand for or demand peace. There are a lot of angry and violent people in this world and they recognize how inflation is the closest representation to the devil in this world even if they cannot smell the oxygen but have a monopoly over oxygen. What is wrong with oxygen?